Gay Bar Attack

[Garth33]

best news is the perp is DEAD! Doesn't make up for what he did but at least he saves us the cost of a trial for someone who didn't derserve to be on the earth in the first place!

 

[Dr Rock]

best news is the perp is DEAD!

yeah. how convenient for the media and politicians - they were sitting there wondering how they were gonna sweep THIS one under the rug, when the guy ups and dies on his own, saving them the trouble.

 

[B_Stronzo]

yeah. how convenient for the media and politicians - they were sitting there wondering how they were gonna sweep THIS one under the rug, when the guy ups and dies on his own, saving them the trouble.

Exactly.

You've nailed that one, Dr. Rock, ever so "squarely on the head".

Trouble is, his neo-nazi cronies will no make a frickin' martyr of the son of bitch. I'd far rather he'd survived to face those he attacked.

Yup. No question. 'THIS one' has effectively been 'swept under the rug'.

 

[Shelby]

I detest the idea that someone murdering me or a family member could receive a lighter sentence than someone murdering a minority or homosexual.

 

[madame_zora]

I detest the idea that someone murdering me or a family member could receive a lighter sentence than someone murdering a minority or homosexual.

That is really a rub, and I can completely sympathise with that feeling. The only thing I can really offer is that you stand far less chance of being murdered for being who you are than a minority or homosexual. No, it's not "fair", but neither are the circumstances in which these people find themselves.

 

[GottaBigOne]

The likelyhood of being murdered for a certain reason does not make the murder any less heinous when it does happen.

 

[madame_zora]

The likelyhood of being murdered for a certain reason does not make the murder any less heinous when it does happen.

No, it certainly doesn't and I don't mean to insinuate that it does. What I'm saying is that something has to be done to take the target sign off their heads, do you not agree? Homosexuals should not have to endure a higher chance of being murdered just so mainstream america won't be offended. While I agree completely that is feels insulting that a person mudering ME might get a lesser sentence than someone who murders a gay man, no one's really HUNTING me, see the difference?

 

[B_Stronzo]

The likelyhood of being murdered for a certain reason does not make the murder any less heinous when it does happen.

I'm sure there's not one of us here who suggests it would be. And you and I both know that's not the topic of this thread. It appears to me there's a pervasive underlying subcurrent to this thread that wants to somehow minimize what this BASTARD did in the gay bar in Massachusetts. Those of us sensitive to homophobia in ALL its forms recognize it even when it's heavily guised in rhetoric.

No amount of idealistic logic or doing a fandago around legalities is going to deter my inclination to think that there's a subliminal homophobia wrapped around some of the posted comments here.

You know what GottaBigOne? The fucker went out to hatchet fags like me to death. He had an agenda and a hateful one at that. He used nazi "freedom of speech" (not) logic to justify his rampage and those like him on his website at MySpace are hoping he "rests in peace". Talk to me when you're 34 rather than 24.

The seriousness of this thing may be lost on you but as I said to one other poster "walk a mile in my shoes" and see where you stand. Until then kindly stuff the logic of detachment. It's losing its "soundness" by your every post.

By your 'logic' the residents of Alabama should have been allowed to vote on school integration in the 1960s.

 

[GottaBigOne]

I do see the difference. And I do agree that something needs to be done in order to "take the traget signs off their heads". I disagree though that enacting "hate crime" legislation does anything but fuel the fire. It raises more resentment, because the perception is that homosexuals are more protected than heterosexuals.
The only practical way to reduce bigotry is through education. You CAN NOT force a mind, it just doesn't work. To change people's ideas you must convince them, if you can't convince them then there is nothing to be done. When they then violate someone's rights then you must prosecute them for their crime. Being a bigot is not and should not be a crime and no one should be punished for being a bigot. If they act on their irrational whims and do kill someone, then they should be given the death penalty. It is my contention that anyone who commits first degree (premeditated) murder deserves the death penalty no questions about it, unless the evidence against them is lacking. Their reason for committing that murder should have nothing to do with it.
If you really believe that harsher punishments do work well asa deterrant, then if first degree murder alwaus carried the death penalty as a consequence then people would murder gays for being gays less as well. EQUALITY means equal. Prosecute murder more harshly, and "hate" murders will be prosecuted harsher as well.

 

[B_Stronzo]

No, it certainly doesn't and I don't mean to insinuate that it does. What I'm saying is that something has to be done to take the target sign off their heads, do you not agree? Homosexuals should not have to endure a higher chance of being murdered just so mainstream america won't be offended. While I agree completely that is feels insulting that a person mudering ME might get a lesser sentence than someone who murders a gay man, no one's really HUNTING me, see the difference?

Oh he "sees" it zora. Better than either of us knows.

 

[GottaBigOne]

It appears to me there's a pervasive underlying subcurrent to this thread that wants to somehow minimize what this BASTARD did in the gay bar in Massachusetts.

I do not seek to minimize what happened. I just don't think legally it should be viewed as worse just because the offender was motivated by homophobia.

Talk to me when you're 34 rather than 24.

Please dispense with the ad homs, it says more about you than about me. My age has nothing to do with the soundness of my arguments. You attacking my age only reveals the strength of my arguments, and the fact that you can't attack them.

By your 'logic' the residents of Alabama should have been allowed to vote on school integration in the 1960s.

By my logic the government shouldn't be involved in public education, but I assume thats a different discussion all together. It is my contention that PRIVATE CITIZENS have the right to whatever beliefs they want, as long as they don't infringe upon the right of life of another. The government public educational system however does not enjoy that same freedom. It must NOT discriminate on the basis of race, sexuality, gender, sex, whatever.

 

[madame_zora]

Oh he "sees" it zora. Better than either of us knows.

You might be surprised, I see GBO as a person who does try to live by his principles.

GBO, I agree with you in logic. The thing is, in practicality, these men who murder gay men get to use the "Gay Panic Defense". Since that is given, a subject in the equation, should there not also be something to balance that out? In reality, they are receiveing a lesser sentence, and in our history it has already been proven that laws enacted to protect the rights of minorities have aided in social change in violence against blacks. Why then would we not use an already proven method of correcting an imbalance?

 

[GottaBigOne]

If it is the fact of "gay panic" defense that is unjust, then we must simply get rid of that as an adequate defense. That I guess would be accomplished(since I am not a lawyer) by juries not buying it, or by judges throwing it out as inaddmissable. Those two remedies require the changing of people's minds, those of the judges and the juries, so it gets back to what I said before.
As a matter of fact, if in fact as you say so people are using the "gay panic" defense to achieve lesser sentences, then making harsher sentences for hate crimes actually wouldn't do anything to correct this, because those that use the "gay panic" defense effectively would never recieve the harsher defense. You see? You want to correct peopel who avoid a conviction unjustly by making those that are alrewady convicted pay a higher price, effectively punishing them because they did adequately abuse the system. This only gives incentive to offenders to abuse the system.

In reality, they are receiveing a lesser sentence, and in our history it has already been proven that laws enacted to protect the rights of minorities have aided in social change in violence against blacks. Why then would we not use an already proven method of correcting an imbalance?

I think that is more proof that getting rid of unjust laws has aided in blacks' accpetance into society. You don't balance an injustice on one side of the scale by adding another on the other side. You balance an injustice on one side of the scale by getting rid of it.

 

[BuddyBoy]

I do not seek to minimize what happened. I just don't think legally it should be viewed as worse just because the offender was motivated by homophobia.

Motivation is very important in characterizing any crime - it's what we call the mens rea or state of mind as opposed to just the actus reus which is the actual action of the crime.

The mes rea HAS to be considered in all crimes, but it's critical in hate crimes because it also speaks to the likelihood that the person committing the act may do so again. Someone with an irrational hatred of gays or african americans or asians - a hatred strong enough to drive them to violence - is more likely to be driven to violence again, in part because the target of their hatred is not insignificant in number, nor is their contact with that group easily controlled. I'd like to see someone swear out a restraining order keeping this perp 300 feet away from all homosexuals. Yeah, right. That's workable.

The mens rea is also key when it comes to diffentiating between free speech and hate speech. Hate Speech is no more protected as free speech as is yelling Fire! in a crowded theatre. In fact, here in Canada we've encountered some cases where the concept of free speech and freedom of religion have been attempted as a defence for hate speech, but the government isn't buying it. Just becuase you are a minister doesn't give you the right to preach hatred against another group. Especially to the level we were seeing it last year when scores of churches were denouncing same-sex marriage in Canada.

Finally, remember that hate-crimes legislation doesn't only protect minorities. When the protected grounds are race, for example, that doesn't just mean a minority race, but the majority as well. If a white guy gets beat up by some minority guys, and the attack is based on racial hatred, that's a hate crime too. And it should be, just the same as other special circumstance are considered with any crime - i.e. laying in wait vs. crime of passion, Plotted vs. accident, deminished responsibility vs. evil incarnate. You get the picture.

 

[GottaBigOne]

I do get the picture, and I like your use of the word irrational hatred. It should be the irrationality of the killers motivation that goes into consideration, not the specific type of irrationality. It is my opinion that any murder that is found to be motivated by racial hatred would fit into first degree murder and should be punishable by death. Motivation matters in determining whether or not a killing was murder or accident, I am not debating that. I am debating whether nor not it matter after it has been decided that it is murder. I don't think racial motivation makes murder worse, I think it makes it murder in some cases.

{deit: by "some cases" I mean that there are other things which make killing "murder" other than racial motivation}

Also, it amazes me about your and seemingly Canda's attitude toward free speech, but thats for another thread.

 

[BuddyBoy]

I detest the idea that someone murdering me or a family member could receive a lighter sentence than someone murdering a minority or homosexual.

Sentencing is dependent on a number of factors, but race or sexual orientation doesn't enter into it directly. It's rather the circumstances and motivation of the killing.

If one family member killed another family member in a crime a passion, they would receive one sentence.

If there was a conspiricy, plotting or laying in wait, there would be a harsher sentence.

Someone who kills with no justification except hatered of the victim's race, sexual orientation or sex, is tantamount to a potential serial killer, and frankly, I think they should be punished the hashest of all. Not because of who they kill but because of why they kill.

 

[GottaBigOne]

Thats exactly what I am saying.

 

[BuddyBoy]

I do get the picture, and I like your use of the word irrational hatred. It should be the irrationality of the killers motivation that goes into consideration, not the specific type of irrationality.

Exactly, but there is a loophole in the law as it stands now. Without protection for sexual orientation in the law, you cannot charge the perp on the basis of their irrational hatred of gays. Someone hates women? Yup, you can charge! They hate a racial group? Yup, you can charge 'em! Fags? Well based on the 25 vs 75 year figures, you could say it's kill one, get two free.

Not the world I want to live in.

Of course, the unspoken by some, and I'm not assuming you're one of them GBO, is that they'd rather have everything covered without explictly mentioning gays and lesbians because they want to be fair but don't want anything that looks like legal or public approval of the gay "lifestyle."

 

[GottaBigOne]

I am more explicitly saying that: it is not necessary to put anything into the law specifically covering if you kill because you hate women, or hate blakcs, or whatever. I am saying that it doesn't matter what your reason for killing someone is, if it is any reason but self defense, then you are a murderer plain and simple, and should get the death penalty. This covers all hate crimes and all reasons, including, because he was gay or because he was black, or whatever.

{edit: I guess another reason for killing that is not murder would be accident. Just to cover all the bases.}

 

[davidjh7]

I only have one thing to say about these and attacks like them. I will never be bashed again, as I was when I was younger. If someone attacks me soley for my sexual orientation, they will get attacked in return. I will use ANY means necessary to put down the attack. Any weapons, any dirty tricks, any laws, any form I can use. I will do all I can to destroy them and their lives. I will drive them to suicide if I don't end up killing them myself in self defence. I am normally a very gentle guy, not prone to violence. But I will not tolerate it ever again, from anyone. I may die in the process, but the &^$*(*(*%& is going with me. Fundies can hate and encourage the killing and bashing of gay people, while talking out of the other sides of their mouth all they want, caliming they aren;t responsible. If a Christian group protests at a gay event, they have that right, by law. As do I if I want to protest outside their church, making all kinds of hate noises. If they want to shoot up our meeting places, then I guess they can have thier churches firebombed, which seems to already be happening. Hate breeds hate. I never advocate violence or hate as a means to accomplish anything. But I warn any that I will not sit passively by and die at the hands of bigotry. So, a warning to any who think that all gay men are pussies, waiting to be beat and killed....bring it on, mofo. But make sure your will is up to date.